Speculation: Buyout Parise, yes or no?

[Dr Jan Itor]

And that matters when talking about cap hit because...?

... because cap hit isn't the only consideration, but it's the only one you want to recognize. I think that's faulty.

 

[Bazeek]

And they're all still tradeable without a Parise buyout as well.



The downside is you lock yourself into that cap hit without the possibility of escaping it. Beyond that, you have a 900k dead cap hit for four years after his contract should be done. Which sure, isn't a lot, but in your calculations a few posts back, you're talking about 900k being the difference between it working and it not working. So maybe it's not something to look forward to when the team should, in theory, be more competitive for those four years than it is now. The upside is something like LTIR, or paying someone less to take him than you would now, or mutual termination, or at the very least, an extra 400k in cap space for the three years his contract would still be active, and an extra 400k the three years after that, and one less year of that dead hit.

The trailing 4 years of $800k is definitely the main downside, but it's well worth it in my opinion. I don't think that it will impede us in any substantial way.

But yeah, we get back to LTIR as the one hope here because it's really the only way to get out from that contract. The other hypotheticals are:

Trade: If it doesn't happen now it's probably never going to happen. Yes his term gets shorter but it's still a $7.5m cap hit for an increasingly useless player. No matter what we're paying some substantial assets to offload him, and it may carry the risk of cap recapture if he isn't immediately bought out.

Retirement: Probably worse cap-wise than the buyout.

A later buyout: The buyout cap hit goes down a few hundred thousand each year, but it never really gets better. If it's terrible now it's terrible next summer and beyond as well.

Mutual contract termination: This would also have to happen now since the only upside for Parise is the possibility of signing elsewhere. I don't think he's going to find many suitors beyond this summer.

LTIR: At this point I'll have to try looking at how this works again, because it's the only other likely option. I think it's quite likely he legitimately ends up here with 2 years, but I'm not sure exactly what we'd need to do to leverage it correctly.

 

[AKL]

... because cap hit isn't the only consideration, but it's the only one you want to recognize. I think that's faulty.

Yes because your only other consideration is us choosing which one of Greenway or Foligno we want to keep, vs. Seattle choosing which one they want. And you can navigate around that without a buyout. The reason I'm focusing on the cap hit is because it's the only consideration that actually matters when you're talking about a buyout.

The only benefit the buyout confers to us is getting 4M in space on season sooner, which you can get by moving Rask instead without incurring the negatives of a buyout. If you're operating under the assumption that Greenway or Foligno are the expansion draft casualty, what does it really matter which one it is? You're going to lose someone in the expansion draft regardless, stop trying to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

And if you're talking about moving Greenway anyway? Just let him be the casualty. Trading everyone you don't want to lose just so you lose someone you can stomach losing defeats the purpose.

 

[AKL]

The cap recapture at this point is actually significantly better than a buyout. If you can come to an arrangement where we're stuck with the recapture penalty, do that one. Moving forward, there is never going to be a point where getting saddled with the recapture penalty is worse than the buyout. Whether he retires this summer, or in any of the next two after that, recapture is better.

 

[Prior]

If Parise doesn’t feel he’s injured and wants to fight that, good chance the Wild will get their hand slapped given the Lightning and the outrage around their LTIR usage this year.

 

[AKL]

If Parise doesn’t feel he’s injured and wants to fight that, good chance the Wild will get their hand slapped given the Lightning and the outrage around their LTIR usage this year.

No one is talking about forcing him onto LTIR for the next four years.

 

[MuckOG]

Parise wants to play, no chance he does the Wild a solid by willingly going on LTIR unless he has a legitimate injury

 

[Prior]

No one is talking about forcing him onto LTIR for the next four years.

Clearly. But if he’s stays on the team and is playing minimally, are we just hoping he wakes up one morning with his back flaring up? Otherwise, why is LTIR being mentioned at all? Good chance LTIR is addressed to some degree before the Wild can truly take advantage because of course that will happen.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Yes because your only other consideration is us choosing which one of Greenway or Foligno we want to keep, vs. Seattle choosing which one they want. And you can navigate around that without a buyout. The reason I'm focusing on the cap hit is because it's the only consideration that actually matters when you're talking about a buyout.

The only benefit the buyout confers to us is getting 4M in space on season sooner, which you can get by moving Rask instead without incurring the negatives of a buyout. If you're operating under the assumption that Greenway or Foligno are the expansion draft casualty, what does it really matter which one it is? You're going to lose someone in the expansion draft regardless, stop trying to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

And if you're talking about moving Greenway anyway? Just let him be the casualty. Trading everyone you don't want to lose just so you lose someone you can stomach losing defeats the purpose.

Because maybe, in the name of asset preservation, you actually really want to keep the 24 year old instead of the 30 year old.

I know I'm going to lose someone in expansion. I'd be choosing to lose somebody that I think is a lesser asset at not a ton of extra cost or downside.

 

[AKL]

Clearly. But if he’s stays on the team and is playing minimally, are we just hoping he wakes up one morning with his back flaring up? Otherwise, why is LTIR being mentioned at all? Good chance LTIR is addressed to some degree before the Wild can truly take advantage because of course that will happen.

Because as of now, LTIR hasn't been addressed in that way, very likely won't be addressed in that way, and is still a possibility, even if you think it's a remote one, that could end up happening. I've never claimed it as the most likely scenario, or something that's within our control, but it's not out of the question for a 37 year old with a history of back problems.

 

[AKL]

Because maybe, in the name of asset preservation, you actually really want to keep the 24 year old instead of the 30 year old.

I know I'm going to lose someone in expansion. I'd be choosing to lose somebody that I think is a lesser asset at not a ton of extra cost or downside.

And if you have no preference, or actually prefer to keep Foligno? Then what?

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

And if you have no preference, or actually prefer to keep Foligno? Then what?

Then you stand where you're standing, I guess. I'm not going to say that you're wrong, but I think that you're wrong.

 

[AKL]

Then you stand where you're standing, I guess. I'm not going to say that you're wrong, but I think that you're wrong.

So we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion on the difference between losing Greenway and losing Foligno then.

 

[Prior]

Because as of now, LTIR hasn't been addressed in that way, very likely won't be addressed in that way, and is still a possibility, even if you think it's a remote one, that could end up happening. I've never claimed it as the most likely scenario, or something that's within our control, but it's not out of the question for a 37 year old with a history of back problems.

So we’re hoping for Parise to change his mentality that’s he’s probably had for nearly all of his cognitive life or a injury to rise out of nowhere. That’s the end game?

As I said before, a buyout reflects clarity and closure. I feel there’s value in that in a situation that the team cannot possibly “win.”

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

So we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion on the difference between losing Greenway and losing Foligno then.

You betcha.

 

[Prior]

For what it’s worth, I think this front office protects Foligno over Greenway and I think they don’t think twice about it.

Not saying it’s right or anything other than moronic, but that’s the impression I get. Wouldn’t be surprised if they value Hartman over Greenway as well.

 

[AKL]

So we’re hoping for Parise to change his mentality that’s he’s probably had for nearly all of his cognitive life or a injury to rise out of nowhere. That’s the end game?

As I said before, a buyout reflects clarity and closure. I feel there’s value in that in a situation that the team cannot possibly “win.”

Obviously I'm not hoping for Parise to suffer a career ending injury. If that were to happen, that would be the best case scenario for our cap situation, but I'm not going to sit here saying that hoping for a longshot LTIR resolution is the plan.

Holding on to Parise beyond this year makes for a better buy out penalty, if that's the route they do end up going; it makes for a more mutually palatable contract termination, if that's what they feel is best; it makes it easier and cheaper to move the contract via trade, if that's what needs to happen. Hell, if we really want to shoot for the stars, maybe Parise has somewhat of a resurgence next season using the treatment this year as motivation. Whatever the case ends up being, it's going to be better next year than it is this year.

 

[AKL]

For what it’s worth, I think this front office protects Foligno over Greenway and I think they don’t think twice about it.

Not saying it’s right or anything other than moronic, but that’s the impression I get. Wouldn’t be surprised if they value Hartman over Greenway as well.

I agree with this.

 

[Bazeek]

The cap recapture at this point is actually significantly better than a buyout. If you can come to an arrangement where we're stuck with the recapture penalty, do that one. Moving forward, there is never going to be a point where getting saddled with the recapture penalty is worse than the buyout. Whether he retires this summer, or in any of the next two after that, recapture is better.

Recapture Penalties vs Buyouts

Year	Cumulative cap	Cumulative salary	Cumulative cap benefit	Recapture schedule	Buyout schedule
2021	67846149	88000000	20153851	$7.5m, $7.5m, $5.1m	$2.3m, $6.3m, $7.3m, $7.3m
2022	75384610	94000000	18615390	$7.5m, $7.5m, $3.6m	$5.9m, $6.9m, $6.9m
2023	82923071	96000000	13076929	$7.5m, $6m	$6.8m, $6.8m
2024	90461532	97000000	6538468	$6.5m	$6.8m

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

To me they look pretty comparable. The total money might be lower for recapture in some cases, but it's not by much. Mostly it's a matter of being back-loaded vs front-loaded.

And the flip side is that the timing is less predictable because it's Parise's decision and not the team's. It looks like the one possible win would be if he retired this offseason, but I don't think that's in the cards.

 

[AKL]

Recapture Penalties vs Buyouts

Year	Cumulative cap	Cumulative salary	Cumulative cap benefit	Recapture schedule	Buyout schedule
2021	67846149	88000000	20153851	$7.5m, $7.5m, $5.1m	$2.3m, $6.3m, $7.3m, $7.3m
2022	75384610	94000000	18615390	$7.5m, $7.5m, $3.6m	$5.9m, $6.9m, $6.9m
2023	82923071	96000000	13076929	$7.5m, $6m	$6.8m, $6.8m
2024	90461532	97000000	6538468	$6.5m	$6.8m

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

To me they look pretty comparable. The total money might be lower for recapture in some cases, but it's not by much. Mostly it's a matter of being back-loaded vs front-loaded.

And the flip side is that the timing is less predictable because it's Parise's decision and not the team's. It looks like the one possible win would be if he retired this offseason, but I don't think that's in the cards.

As players continually get more expensive year after year, having those penalties front-loaded is much better than having them back-loaded. Given that they don't exceed his cap hit, you already have those high years accounted for.

 

[sisseton]

Anyone have Tonya Harding's contact info. /s

 

[Bazeek]

As players continually get more expensive year after year, having those penalties front-loaded is much better than having them back-loaded. Given that they don't exceed his cap hit, you already have those high years accounted for.

I think that loses a little steam under a flat cap, which will likely be the case for the next 4 years... but still, it's an angle to consider. My main quibble is that retirement probably doesn't seriously hit the radar until 2023, at which point it's basically the same as a buyout or just having him on the team. I guess it'd save a little in 2024-25.

 

[AKL]

I think that loses a little steam under a flat cap, which will likely be the case for the next 4 years... but still, it's an angle to consider. My main quibble is that retirement probably doesn't seriously hit the radar until 2023, at which point it's basically the same as a buyout or just having him on the team. I guess it'd save a little in 2024-25.

But the point is it's never worse, because not only do you save a little money every year, but you don't have the dead cap at the end of it. Retirement may not be in the cards for a couple years, but contract termination should be a discussion Guerin is having with Parise if Parise seriously wants out. Parise has every right to decline that option, but Guerin has every right to use Parise as a 13th forward until Parise can agree to something that isn't bad for the team. Like I said at the very beginning, if leaving is Parise's primary motivation, his best bet is to work with Guerin, not try to force a buy out that isn't good for the organization.

So now I feel like I've come full circle.

 

[mouser]

Recapture Penalties vs Buyouts

Year	Cumulative cap	Cumulative salary	Cumulative cap benefit	Recapture schedule	Buyout schedule
2021	67846149	88000000	20153851	$7.5m, $7.5m, $5.1m	$2.3m, $6.3m, $7.3m, $7.3m
2022	75384610	94000000	18615390	$7.5m, $7.5m, $3.6m	$5.9m, $6.9m, $6.9m
2023	82923071	96000000	13076929	$7.5m, $6m	$6.8m, $6.8m
2024	90461532	97000000	6538468	$6.5m	$6.8m

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

To me they look pretty comparable. The total money might be lower for recapture in some cases, but it's not by much. Mostly it's a matter of being back-loaded vs front-loaded.

And the flip side is that the timing is less predictable because it's Parise's decision and not the team's. It looks like the one possible win would be if he retired this offseason, but I don't think that's in the cards.

The NHL and the CBA have never clarified (or adjudicated) which cap hit formula would be used when a player subject to Cap Recapture is bought out using a Ordinary Course Buyout.

If a player like Parise played their entire contract with the signing team then a Ordinary Buyout would deliver similar total cap penalties as a Cap Recapture.

However if a player subject to Cap Recapture was traded and bought out by another team then the cap penalties would be very different to the two teams.


In the most recent situations where two different cap hit formulas came into conflict the NHL decided:

1) Age 35+ cap hit supersedes Ordinary Buyouts.
2) Compliance Buyout supersedes Cap Recapture.

Neither one gives us a answer how the NHL would prioritize Ordinary Buyouts and Cap Recapture.

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

Sounds like if we trade him and another team buys him out we would still get hit with recapture if he retires early. I don’t know, I wouldn’t want to give up a lot of assets and still get hit with essentially the same cap hit. Mind as well buy him out.